Proving Loss Causation When Pension Plan Investment Results Disappoint

by King & Spalding

The First Circuit Shifts The Burden To The Mutual Fund Company and Evens The Circuit Split

Although philosophers view burden shifting as a logical fallacy, courts have long been willing, under certain circumstances, to shift the burden to the accused to prove it did nothing wrong.  In what is now an even split among the majority of circuits, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit held in Brotherston v. Putnam Investments, LLC[i] that once a plaintiff has proven a loss following breach of fiduciary duty under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), the burden shifts to the fiduciary to prove that the loss was not caused by breach—in other words, that “a loss would have occurred even had the fiduciary acted prudently.”[ii]


ERISA class actions challenging the prudence of retirement plan investments have been on the rise in recent years, with more and more cases surviving motions to dismiss.  In particular, there has been a surge in cases against universities challenging the fees and performance of investment options in their retirement plans[iii] and against financial service providers who offered “affiliated” funds to their own employees.[iv]  Of the dozens such lawsuits filed in recent years, an increasing number have proceeded beyond the pleading stage.  The result is that more and more ERISA breach of fiduciary duty cases are decided on summary judgment or following trial—and practical considerations, like burdens of proof, have come into sharper focus.  

Brotherston is a ready example of this trend.  In Brotherston, participants in Putnam’s 401(k) plan alleged that plan fiduciaries breached their duties of prudence and loyalty by offering only affiliated investment options and failing to consider other non-affiliated options.[v]  In particular, plaintiffs alleged that the fiduciaries responsible for selecting, monitoring, and removing plan investments blindly followed the governing plan document’s instruction to automatically offer any Putnam mutual fund that was generally available to other retirement plans.[vi]  And, for most of the class period in Brotherston, Putnam’s 401(k) plan offered only affiliated funds.[vii]

After plaintiffs presented their case during a seven-day bench trial, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts entered judgment on partial findings in favor of defendants under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52(c).[viii]  The district court found that the defendants did not investigate the affiliated funds before including them in the plan, did not monitor them once in the plan, and did not remove a single fund from the plan lineup for underperformance, not even when funds had received “fail” ratings from another Putnam affiliate.[ix]  Despite this, the court held that the prudence claim still failed because plaintiffs had not shown any loss resulting from a breach, as the text of ERISA requires.[x]  Rather, the district court found that plaintiffs’ claims depended on a “procedural breach” theory in which the resulting choices of an imprudent process were imprudent per se.  The district court rejected this theory, finding that it would be an “unwarranted expansion of ERISA’s seemingly narrow focus on actual losses to a plan resulting from specific incidents of fiduciary breach.”[xi]  As the district court noted, “a person could lack an independent process to monitor his investments and still end up with prudent investments, even if it was the result of sheer luck.”[xii]

The First Circuit’s Opinion

The First Circuit vacated the district court’s judgment in part and remanded for further proceedings.  After accepting the district court’s findings with respect to the lack of an independent selection and monitoring process, the First Circuit determined that the court’s findings with respect to loss and causation were erroneous.  While noting that the district court had “correctly observed that such a breach does not mean that the Plan necessarily suffered any loss,” the First Circuit found that “[b]y allowing its analysis on loss to be driven by its concern regarding the objective prudence of the Putnam funds, the district court in essence required plaintiffs to show causation as part of its case on loss.”[xiii]  The First Circuit, instead, analyzed loss and causation separately, finding that the district court should have considered the analysis of plaintiffs’ expert comparing the total returns of the affiliated funds with those of so-called comparator index funds to determine whether the plaintiffs made a sufficient showing of losses to the plan.[xiv]  The First Circuit was at pains to make clear that it did not determine whether the expert’s benchmarks were suitable, calculations were correct, or analysis was otherwise reliable, but simply held that district court erred by finding that the expert’s analysis was insufficient to establish loss as a matter of law under Rule 52(c).[xv]  

Finally, the First Circuit moved to causation, noting that the circuit courts are split on which party bears the burden of proving that any loss to the plan was caused by the fiduciary’s breaches.  Finding guidance in the common law of trusts, the First Circuit agreed with the holdings of the Fourth[xvi], Fifth[xvii], and Eighth[xviii] Circuits in approving of a burden-shifting approach wherein the defendant has the burden of proving that the loss to the Plan was not caused by the fiduciary’s breach—“that is, to prove that the resulting investment decision was objectively prudent.”[xix]  The Brotherston court reasoned that because an “ERISA fiduciary often . . . has available many options from which to build a portfolio of investments. . . it makes little sense to have the plaintiff hazard a guess as to what the fiduciary would have done had it not breached its duty in selecting investment vehicles, only to be told ‘guess again.’”[xx]  By doing so, the First Circuit departed from the Sixth[xxi], Ninth[xxii], Tenth[xxiii], and Eleventh[xxiv] Circuits, which have all held that ERISA plaintiffs must establish a causal link between the breaches of duty alleged and the losses purportedly incurred.[xxv]

In addressing Putnam’s concerns (and those of numerous amici) that employers may forgo the risk of offering ERISA plans to employees for fear of liability, the Brotherston court found there to be no evidence of such a trend in the circuits that have already adopted this burden-shifting framework.  In concluding, the court noted that a fiduciary can “easily insulate itself” from liability either by “selecting well-established, low-fee and diversified market index funds” or, for a fiduciary who desires to select funds that try to “beat the market,” it too will be immune as long as it follows a prudent selection and monitoring process.[xxvi]

Key Takeaways

While the Brotherston court was convinced that ERISA fiduciaries can “easily insulate” themselves from liability by following a prudent process or offering a diverse selection of low-cost funds, that is cold comfort to most plan sponsors, who see significant litigation risk in the burden-shifting approach.  While Brotherston involved a retirement plan that offered only affiliated funds, with evidentiary findings that no independent process at all was used to consider, select, and monitor those funds, most other cases are not so clear-cut.  Indeed, many of the fiduciary breach cases that have survived the pleading stage in recent years involve fact-intensive inquiries into the processes used for selecting and monitoring retirement plan investment funds, both affiliated and unaffiliated.  ERISA fiduciaries who plan to mount a primary defense based on the prudence of their processes, then, must be mindful of the governing circuit rule on burdens of proof even at the earlier stages of litigation, to avoid ending up with an adverse finding on breach and empty-handed in mounting a defense with respect to causation.

ERISA fiduciaries in circuits that follow the burden-shifting rule adopted in Brotherston should consider offering expert analysis demonstrating the objective reasonableness of the challenged funds, or at least demonstrating a measure of damages that establishes less losses than the model offered by the plaintiffs’ expert.  This approach would be wise even if the fiduciaries’ primary  defense—upon which they may ultimately prevail—is that they followed a prudent process in selecting and monitoring those funds such that no breach occurred.  Failing to do so in a burden-shifting circuit may leave the fiduciaries with few good defenses if the plaintiffs are able to establish a breach and some reasonably reliable measurement of loss. 

It will also be important to lay a foundation for demonstrating that the “losses” to the plan proffered by plaintiff’s expert are unreliable due to, for example, unsuitable benchmark comparisons, which may also be crucial to defeating the plaintiff’s attempt to demonstrate that a loss occurred in the first instance.  Notably, the Brotherston court did not find that plaintiffs had met their burden of proof with respect to loss; only that the district court erred by finding that plaintiffs’ proffered model was insufficient as a matter of law.

In short, the deepening split that divides the circuits on loss causation in ERISA cases presents practical issues of proof that require counsel in these cases to make strategically important decisions at a relatively early stage in the litigation life cycle.  It remains to be seen how district courts will apply these burdens of proof on summary judgment and at trial, including, in particular, what plaintiffs must do to satisfy their burden of proof with respect to loss.  Regardless of the jurisdiction, however, all ERISA practitioners should be carefully watching how this burden-shifting issue plays out.  The First Circuit has already been asked to stay its mandate in Brotherston so that the defendants can file a petition for certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court, so a definitive answer may be coming in the near term.

[i] 2018 WL 4958829 (1st Cir. Oct. 15, 2018).

[ii] Id. at *10.

[iii] See, e.g., Cunningham v. Cornell Univ., 16-cv-6525 (S.D.N.Y.); Cates v. Trustees of Columbia Univ. in the City of N.Y., 16-cv-6524 (S.D.N.Y.); Clark v. Duke Univ., 16-cv-1044 (M.D.N.C.); Henderson v. Emory Univ., 16-cv-2920 (N.D. Ga.); Sacerdote v. New York Univ., 16-cv-6284 (S.D.N.Y.); Kelly v. The Johns Hopkins Univ., 16-cv-2835 (D. Md.); Sweda v. The Univ. of Penn., 16-cv-4329 (E.D. Pa.); Cassell v. Vanderbilt Univ., 16-cv-2086 (M.D. Tenn.); Tracey v. Mass. Inst. of Tech., 16-cv-11620 (D. Mass.); Vellali v. Yale Univ., 16-cv-1345 (D. Conn.); Short v. Brown Univ., 17-cv-318 (D.R.I.); Divane v. Northwestern Univ., 16-cv-8157 (N.D. Ill.); Nicolas v. Trustees of Princeton Univ., 17-cv-3695 (D.N.J.); Daugherty v. The Univ. of Chicago, 17-cv-3736 (N.D. Ill.); Davis v. Wash. Univ., 17-cv-1641 (E.D. Mo.); Stanley v. George Wash. Univ., 18-cv-878 (D.D.C.); Wilcox v. Georgetown Univ., 18-cv-422 (D.D.C.).

[iv] See, e.g., In re M&T Bank Corp. ERISA Litig., 16-cv-375 (W.D.N.Y.); Baird v. BlackRock Institutional Trust Co., N.A., 17-cv-1892 (N.D. Ca.); Feinberg v. T. Rowe Price Group, Inc., 17-cv-427 (D. Md.); Dorman v. Charles Schwab Corp., 17-cv-285 (N.D. Cal.); Patterson v. Morgan Stanley, 16-cv-6568 (S.D.N.Y.); Beach v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., 17-cv-563 (S.D.N.Y.); Moitoso v. FMR LLC, 18-cv-12122 (D. Mass.); Cervantes v. Invesco Holding Company (US), Inc., 18-cv-2551 (N.D. Ga.).

[v] 2018 WL 4958829, at *2.  Plaintiffs also alleged that the fees charged by Putnam affiliates associated with their mutual funds constituted prohibited transactions under ERISA.

[vi] Id.

[vii] Id. at *1.

[viii] Id.

[ix] Id.

[x] Brotherston v. Putnam, 2017 WL 2634361, at *10-12 (D. Mass. June 19, 2017).

[xi] Id. at *12. 

[xii] Id. at *12.  Finally, the district court held that because plaintiffs had not shown by a preponderance of the evidence that fiduciaries had put their own interests ahead of plan participants, they had not breached the duty of loyalty.  Id. at *8.

[xiii] 2018 WL 4958829, at *10.

[xiv] Id. at *10-11. 

[xv] Id. at *11 & n.14.

[xvi] Tatum v. RJR Pension Inv. Comm., 761 F.3d 346 (4th Cir. 2014). 

[xvii] McDonald v. Provident Indem. Life Ins. Co., 60 F.3d 234, 237 (5th Cir. 1995).

[xviii] Martin v. Feilen, 965 F.2d 660 (8th Cir. 1992).

[xix] 2018 WL 4958829, at *11-*15.

[xx] Id. at *14.

[xxi] Saumer v. Cliffs Natural Resources Inc., 853 F.3d 855 (6th Cir. 2017).

[xxii] Wright v. Oregon Metallurgical Corp., 360 F.3d 1090 (9th Cir. 2004).

[xxiii] Pioneer Centres Holding Co. Emp. Stock Ownership Plan & Tr. v. Alerus Fin., N.A., 858 F.3d 1324 (10th Cir. 2017), cert. dismissed per stipulation, No. 17-667, 2018 WL 4496523 (U.S. Sept. 20, 2018).

[xxiv] Willett v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Ala., 953 F.2d 1335 (11th Cir. 1992).

[xxv] As the First Circuit noted, the Second Circuit appears to have conflicting holdings on the issue.  2018 WL 4958829, at *11 n.15 (citing New York State Teamsters Council Health and Hosp. Fund v. Estate of DePerno, 18 F.3d 179, 180 (2d Cir. 1994); Silverman v. Mutual Ben. Life Ins. Co., 138 F.3d 98, 104 (2d Cir. 1998)).

[xxvi] Id. at *14. The First Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal of one of the prohibited transaction claims, but vacated the dismissal of the second prohibited transaction claim.  The court also affirmed the district court’s dismissal of plaintiffs’ breach of the duty of loyalty claim.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© King & Spalding | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

King & Spalding

King & Spalding on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide

JD Supra Privacy Policy

Updated: May 25, 2018:

JD Supra is a legal publishing service that connects experts and their content with broader audiences of professionals, journalists and associations.

This Privacy Policy describes how JD Supra, LLC ("JD Supra" or "we," "us," or "our") collects, uses and shares personal data collected from visitors to our website (located at (our "Website") who view only publicly-available content as well as subscribers to our services (such as our email digests or author tools)(our "Services"). By using our Website and registering for one of our Services, you are agreeing to the terms of this Privacy Policy.

Please note that if you subscribe to one of our Services, you can make choices about how we collect, use and share your information through our Privacy Center under the "My Account" dashboard (available if you are logged into your JD Supra account).

Collection of Information

Registration Information. When you register with JD Supra for our Website and Services, either as an author or as a subscriber, you will be asked to provide identifying information to create your JD Supra account ("Registration Data"), such as your:

  • Email
  • First Name
  • Last Name
  • Company Name
  • Company Industry
  • Title
  • Country

Other Information: We also collect other information you may voluntarily provide. This may include content you provide for publication. We may also receive your communications with others through our Website and Services (such as contacting an author through our Website) or communications directly with us (such as through email, feedback or other forms or social media). If you are a subscribed user, we will also collect your user preferences, such as the types of articles you would like to read.

Information from third parties (such as, from your employer or LinkedIn): We may also receive information about you from third party sources. For example, your employer may provide your information to us, such as in connection with an article submitted by your employer for publication. If you choose to use LinkedIn to subscribe to our Website and Services, we also collect information related to your LinkedIn account and profile.

Your interactions with our Website and Services: As is true of most websites, we gather certain information automatically. This information includes IP addresses, browser type, Internet service provider (ISP), referring/exit pages, operating system, date/time stamp and clickstream data. We use this information to analyze trends, to administer the Website and our Services, to improve the content and performance of our Website and Services, and to track users' movements around the site. We may also link this automatically-collected data to personal information, for example, to inform authors about who has read their articles. Some of this data is collected through information sent by your web browser. We also use cookies and other tracking technologies to collect this information. To learn more about cookies and other tracking technologies that JD Supra may use on our Website and Services please see our "Cookies Guide" page.

How do we use this information?

We use the information and data we collect principally in order to provide our Website and Services. More specifically, we may use your personal information to:

  • Operate our Website and Services and publish content;
  • Distribute content to you in accordance with your preferences as well as to provide other notifications to you (for example, updates about our policies and terms);
  • Measure readership and usage of the Website and Services;
  • Communicate with you regarding your questions and requests;
  • Authenticate users and to provide for the safety and security of our Website and Services;
  • Conduct research and similar activities to improve our Website and Services; and
  • Comply with our legal and regulatory responsibilities and to enforce our rights.

How is your information shared?

  • Content and other public information (such as an author profile) is shared on our Website and Services, including via email digests and social media feeds, and is accessible to the general public.
  • If you choose to use our Website and Services to communicate directly with a company or individual, such communication may be shared accordingly.
  • Readership information is provided to publishing law firms and authors of content to give them insight into their readership and to help them to improve their content.
  • Our Website may offer you the opportunity to share information through our Website, such as through Facebook's "Like" or Twitter's "Tweet" button. We offer this functionality to help generate interest in our Website and content and to permit you to recommend content to your contacts. You should be aware that sharing through such functionality may result in information being collected by the applicable social media network and possibly being made publicly available (for example, through a search engine). Any such information collection would be subject to such third party social media network's privacy policy.
  • Your information may also be shared to parties who support our business, such as professional advisors as well as web-hosting providers, analytics providers and other information technology providers.
  • Any court, governmental authority, law enforcement agency or other third party where we believe disclosure is necessary to comply with a legal or regulatory obligation, or otherwise to protect our rights, the rights of any third party or individuals' personal safety, or to detect, prevent, or otherwise address fraud, security or safety issues.
  • To our affiliated entities and in connection with the sale, assignment or other transfer of our company or our business.

How We Protect Your Information

JD Supra takes reasonable and appropriate precautions to insure that user information is protected from loss, misuse and unauthorized access, disclosure, alteration and destruction. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. You should keep in mind that no Internet transmission is ever 100% secure or error-free. Where you use log-in credentials (usernames, passwords) on our Website, please remember that it is your responsibility to safeguard them. If you believe that your log-in credentials have been compromised, please contact us at

Children's Information

Our Website and Services are not directed at children under the age of 16 and we do not knowingly collect personal information from children under the age of 16 through our Website and/or Services. If you have reason to believe that a child under the age of 16 has provided personal information to us, please contact us, and we will endeavor to delete that information from our databases.

Links to Other Websites

Our Website and Services may contain links to other websites. The operators of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using our Website or Services and click a link to another site, you will leave our Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We are not responsible for the data collection and use practices of such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of our Website and Services and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Information for EU and Swiss Residents

JD Supra's principal place of business is in the United States. By subscribing to our website, you expressly consent to your information being processed in the United States.

  • Our Legal Basis for Processing: Generally, we rely on our legitimate interests in order to process your personal information. For example, we rely on this legal ground if we use your personal information to manage your Registration Data and administer our relationship with you; to deliver our Website and Services; understand and improve our Website and Services; report reader analytics to our authors; to personalize your experience on our Website and Services; and where necessary to protect or defend our or another's rights or property, or to detect, prevent, or otherwise address fraud, security, safety or privacy issues. Please see Article 6(1)(f) of the E.U. General Data Protection Regulation ("GDPR") In addition, there may be other situations where other grounds for processing may exist, such as where processing is a result of legal requirements (GDPR Article 6(1)(c)) or for reasons of public interest (GDPR Article 6(1)(e)). Please see the "Your Rights" section of this Privacy Policy immediately below for more information about how you may request that we limit or refrain from processing your personal information.
  • Your Rights
    • Right of Access/Portability: You can ask to review details about the information we hold about you and how that information has been used and disclosed. Note that we may request to verify your identification before fulfilling your request. You can also request that your personal information is provided to you in a commonly used electronic format so that you can share it with other organizations.
    • Right to Correct Information: You may ask that we make corrections to any information we hold, if you believe such correction to be necessary.
    • Right to Restrict Our Processing or Erasure of Information: You also have the right in certain circumstances to ask us to restrict processing of your personal information or to erase your personal information. Where you have consented to our use of your personal information, you can withdraw your consent at any time.

You can make a request to exercise any of these rights by emailing us at or by writing to us at:

Privacy Officer
JD Supra, LLC
10 Liberty Ship Way, Suite 300
Sausalito, California 94965

You can also manage your profile and subscriptions through our Privacy Center under the "My Account" dashboard.

We will make all practical efforts to respect your wishes. There may be times, however, where we are not able to fulfill your request, for example, if applicable law prohibits our compliance. Please note that JD Supra does not use "automatic decision making" or "profiling" as those terms are defined in the GDPR.

  • Timeframe for retaining your personal information: We will retain your personal information in a form that identifies you only for as long as it serves the purpose(s) for which it was initially collected as stated in this Privacy Policy, or subsequently authorized. We may continue processing your personal information for longer periods, but only for the time and to the extent such processing reasonably serves the purposes of archiving in the public interest, journalism, literature and art, scientific or historical research and statistical analysis, and subject to the protection of this Privacy Policy. For example, if you are an author, your personal information may continue to be published in connection with your article indefinitely. When we have no ongoing legitimate business need to process your personal information, we will either delete or anonymize it, or, if this is not possible (for example, because your personal information has been stored in backup archives), then we will securely store your personal information and isolate it from any further processing until deletion is possible.
  • Onward Transfer to Third Parties: As noted in the "How We Share Your Data" Section above, JD Supra may share your information with third parties. When JD Supra discloses your personal information to third parties, we have ensured that such third parties have either certified under the EU-U.S. or Swiss Privacy Shield Framework and will process all personal data received from EU member states/Switzerland in reliance on the applicable Privacy Shield Framework or that they have been subjected to strict contractual provisions in their contract with us to guarantee an adequate level of data protection for your data.

California Privacy Rights

Pursuant to Section 1798.83 of the California Civil Code, our customers who are California residents have the right to request certain information regarding our disclosure of personal information to third parties for their direct marketing purposes.

You can make a request for this information by emailing us at or by writing to us at:

Privacy Officer
JD Supra, LLC
10 Liberty Ship Way, Suite 300
Sausalito, California 94965

Some browsers have incorporated a Do Not Track (DNT) feature. These features, when turned on, send a signal that you prefer that the website you are visiting not collect and use data regarding your online searching and browsing activities. As there is not yet a common understanding on how to interpret the DNT signal, we currently do not respond to DNT signals on our site.

Access/Correct/Update/Delete Personal Information

For non-EU/Swiss residents, if you would like to know what personal information we have about you, you can send an e-mail to We will be in contact with you (by mail or otherwise) to verify your identity and provide you the information you request. We will respond within 30 days to your request for access to your personal information. In some cases, we may not be able to remove your personal information, in which case we will let you know if we are unable to do so and why. If you would like to correct or update your personal information, you can manage your profile and subscriptions through our Privacy Center under the "My Account" dashboard. If you would like to delete your account or remove your information from our Website and Services, send an e-mail to

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Privacy Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our Privacy Policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use our Website and Services following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this Privacy Policy, the practices of this site, your dealings with our Website or Services, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at:

JD Supra Cookie Guide

As with many websites, JD Supra's website (located at (our "Website") and our services (such as our email article digests)(our "Services") use a standard technology called a "cookie" and other similar technologies (such as, pixels and web beacons), which are small data files that are transferred to your computer when you use our Website and Services. These technologies automatically identify your browser whenever you interact with our Website and Services.

How We Use Cookies and Other Tracking Technologies

We use cookies and other tracking technologies to:

  1. Improve the user experience on our Website and Services;
  2. Store the authorization token that users receive when they login to the private areas of our Website. This token is specific to a user's login session and requires a valid username and password to obtain. It is required to access the user's profile information, subscriptions, and analytics;
  3. Track anonymous site usage; and
  4. Permit connectivity with social media networks to permit content sharing.

There are different types of cookies and other technologies used our Website, notably:

  • "Session cookies" - These cookies only last as long as your online session, and disappear from your computer or device when you close your browser (like Internet Explorer, Google Chrome or Safari).
  • "Persistent cookies" - These cookies stay on your computer or device after your browser has been closed and last for a time specified in the cookie. We use persistent cookies when we need to know who you are for more than one browsing session. For example, we use them to remember your preferences for the next time you visit.
  • "Web Beacons/Pixels" - Some of our web pages and emails may also contain small electronic images known as web beacons, clear GIFs or single-pixel GIFs. These images are placed on a web page or email and typically work in conjunction with cookies to collect data. We use these images to identify our users and user behavior, such as counting the number of users who have visited a web page or acted upon one of our email digests.

JD Supra Cookies. We place our own cookies on your computer to track certain information about you while you are using our Website and Services. For example, we place a session cookie on your computer each time you visit our Website. We use these cookies to allow you to log-in to your subscriber account. In addition, through these cookies we are able to collect information about how you use the Website, including what browser you may be using, your IP address, and the URL address you came from upon visiting our Website and the URL you next visit (even if those URLs are not on our Website). We also utilize email web beacons to monitor whether our emails are being delivered and read. We also use these tools to help deliver reader analytics to our authors to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

Analytics/Performance Cookies. JD Supra also uses the following analytic tools to help us analyze the performance of our Website and Services as well as how visitors use our Website and Services:

  • HubSpot - For more information about HubSpot cookies, please visit
  • New Relic - For more information on New Relic cookies, please visit
  • Google Analytics - For more information on Google Analytics cookies, visit To opt-out of being tracked by Google Analytics across all websites visit This will allow you to download and install a Google Analytics cookie-free web browser.

Facebook, Twitter and other Social Network Cookies. Our content pages allow you to share content appearing on our Website and Services to your social media accounts through the "Like," "Tweet," or similar buttons displayed on such pages. To accomplish this Service, we embed code that such third party social networks provide and that we do not control. These buttons know that you are logged in to your social network account and therefore such social networks could also know that you are viewing the JD Supra Website.

Controlling and Deleting Cookies

If you would like to change how a browser uses cookies, including blocking or deleting cookies from the JD Supra Website and Services you can do so by changing the settings in your web browser. To control cookies, most browsers allow you to either accept or reject all cookies, only accept certain types of cookies, or prompt you every time a site wishes to save a cookie. It's also easy to delete cookies that are already saved on your device by a browser.

The processes for controlling and deleting cookies vary depending on which browser you use. To find out how to do so with a particular browser, you can use your browser's "Help" function or alternatively, you can visit which explains, step-by-step, how to control and delete cookies in most browsers.

Updates to This Policy

We may update this cookie policy and our Privacy Policy from time-to-time, particularly as technology changes. You can always check this page for the latest version. We may also notify you of changes to our privacy policy by email.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about how we use cookies and other tracking technologies, please contact us at:

- hide

This website uses cookies to improve user experience, track anonymous site usage, store authorization tokens and permit sharing on social media networks. By continuing to browse this website you accept the use of cookies. Click here to read more about how we use cookies.